Van Kedilerinde Glandula Lacrimalis’in Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Görüntülerinden Morfometrik İncelenmesi

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1, 16 - 24, 26.04.2021

Osman Yılmaz

Öz

Bu çalışma, Van kedilerinde glandula lacrimalis’in bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) görüntüleri üzerinden morfometrik ve volümetrik ölçülerini elde etmek ve bu ölçüm değerlerinin hem homotipik varyasyonlar hem de seksüel dimorfizm bakımından biyometrik farklılıklarını belirlemek amacıyla yapıldı. Çalışmada 8 erkek, 8 dişi olmak üzere toplamda 16 adet erişkin sağlıklı Van kedisi glandula lacrimalis’ine ait BT görüntüsü kullanıldı. Sağ ve sol glandula lacrimalis’e ait transversal, sagital ve dorsal kesitlerden morfometrik ölçümler alındı. Daha sonra, volümetrik elipsoid yöntem kullanılarak her bir glandula lacrimalis’in hacim değerleri elde edildi. Morfometrik ve volümetrik değerlerin istatistiki analizi yapıldı. Yapılan morfometrik incelemelerde sağ ve sol glandula lacrimalis’e ait ortalama uzunluk, genişlik, yükseklik değerlerinin erkek kedilerde sırasıyla ortalama 14.26 ± 1.59 mm, 8.59 ± 0.44 mm, 3.85 ± 0.21 mm; dişilerde ise, bu değerler sırasıyla ortalama 11.01 ± 1.01 mm, 7.59 ± 0.96 mm, 3.01± 0.25 mm olarak belirlendi. Ayrıca, glandula lacrimalis’in maksimum hacim değeri erkeklerde ortalama 257.00 ± 45.29 mm3, dişilerde ortalama 133.60 ± 34.77 mm3 olarak hesaplandı. Sonuç olarak, erişkin sağlıklı Van kedilerinde glandula lacrimalis’e ait ölçüm parametrelerinin istatistiksel olarak cinsiyetler arasındaki farklılıkları bilgisayarlı tomografi görüntüleri kullanılarak tespit edildi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bilgisayarlı tomografi, Glandula lacrimalis, Morfometri, Van kedisi

Morphometric Examination of the Lacrimal Gland from Computed Tomography Images in Van Cats

Öz

This study was carried out to obtain morphometric and volumetric measurements of the glandula lacrimalis from computed tomography (CT) images in Van cats and to determine the biometric differences of these measurement values in terms of both homotypic variations and sexual dimorphism. In the study, CT images of a total of 16 adults healthy Van cats glandula lacrimalis, 8 males and 8 females, were used. Morphometric measurements were taken from the transverse, sagittal and dorsal sections of the right and left glandula lacrimalis. Then, volume values of each glandula lacrimalis were obtained by using the volumetric ellipsoid method. Statistical analysis of morphometric and volumetric values was performed. In the morphometric examinations, the mean length, width, and height values of the right and left glandula lacrimalis were determined as average 14.26 ± 1.59 mm, 8.59 ± 0.44 mm, 3.85 ± 0.21 mm, in male cats; average 11.01 ± 1.01 mm, 7.59 ± 0.96 mm, 3.01 ± 0.25 mm, in female cats, respectively. Also, the maximum volume value of glandula lacrimalis was calculated as average 257.00 ± 45.29 mm3 in males and average 133.60 ± 34.77 mm3 in females. As a result, the differences between the genders of the measurement parameters of the glandula lacrimalis were detected using computed tomography images in healthy adult Van cats.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Computed tomography, Glandula lacrimalis, Morphometry, Van cat

Kaynakça

• 1. Cak B., 2017. Turkish Van cat and Turkish Angora cat: a review. J Agr Sci Tech A, 7, 151-159.
• 2. Gelatt KN., 2014. Ophthalmic structures. In “Essentials of Veterinary Ophthalmology”. 3rd ed., 12-39, John Wiley & Sons Inc, USA.
• 3. Liebich HG., Sotonyi P., König HE., 2015. Göz (organum visus). In “Veteriner Anatomi (Evcil Memeli Hayvanlar)”. Ed., HE König, HG Liebich (Ed), Çev Ed., İ Kürtül, İ Türkmenoğlu, 6th ed., 579-600, Medipres, Malatya.
• 4. Poels P., Simoens P., 1994. The lacrimal apparatus of cats. Vlaams Diergeneeskd Tijdschr, 63, 87-89.
• 5. Nöller C., Henninger Grönemeyer DH., Hirschberg RM., Budras KD., 2006. Computed tomography-anatomy of the normal feline nasolacrimal drainage system. Vet Radiol Ultrasound, 47, 53-60.
• 6. Dyce KM., Sack WO., Wensing CJG., 2002. Textbook of Veterinary Anatomy. 3rd ed., Saunders, Philadelphia, United States.
• 7. Brenton H., Hernandez J., Bello F., Strutton P., Purkayastha S., Firth T., Darzi A., 2007. Using multimedia and web 3D to enhance anatomy teaching. Comput Educ, 49, 32-53.
• 8. Lauridsen H., Hansen K., Wang T., Agger P., Andersen JL., Knudsen PS., Rasmussen AS., Uhrenholt L., Pedersen M., 2011. Inside out: modern imaging techniques to reveal animal anatomy. PLoS One. 6, 3, e17879.
• 9. Penninck D., Daniel GB., Brawer R., Tidwell AS., 2001. Cross-sectional imaging techniques in veterinary ophthalmology. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract, 16, 22-39.
• 10. Zwingenberger AL., Park SA., Murphy CJ., 2014. Computed tomographic imaging characteristics of the normal canine lacrimal glands. BMC Vet Res, 10, 116.
• 11. Wisner ER., Zwingenberger AL., 2015. Orbit. In “Atlas of Small Animal CT and MRI”, 69-85, Willey- Blackwell Publishing, USA.
• 12. Gedar Totuk OM., Kalkay AB., Kabadayı K., Demir MK., Barut C., 2018. Evaluation of lacrimal gland dimensions with MR imaging in a Turkish population sample. Int J Morphol, 36, 1431-1438.
• 13. Güngör G., Urfalıoğlu S., 2019. Assessment of lacrimal gland volume with computed tomography in a Turkish population. BSJ Health Sci, 2, 1, 5-8.
• 14. Nawaz S., Lal S., Butt R., Ali M., Shahani B., Dadlani A., 2020. Computed tomography evaluation of normal lacrimal gland dimensions in the adult Pakistani population. Cureus, 12, 3, e7393.
• 15. Draper CE., Adeghate EA., Lawrence PA., Pallot DJ., Garner A., Singh J., 1998. Age-relates changes in morphology and secretory responses of male rat lacrimal gland. J Aut Nerv Syst, 69, 173-183.
• 16. Ding C., Parsa L., Nandoskar P., Zhao P., Wu K., Wang Y., 2010. Duct system of the rabbit lacrimal gland: structural characteristics and role in lacrimal secretion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 51, 2960-2967.
• 17. Nykamp SG., Scrivani PV., Pease AP., 2004. Computed tomography dacryocystography evaluation of the nasolacrimal apparatus. Vet Radiol Ultrasound, 45, 23-28.
• 18. Alsafy MA., 2010. Comparative morphological studies on the lacrimal apparatus of one humped camel, goat, and donkey. JABS, 4, 49-53.
• 19. Pinard CL., Weiss ML., Brightman AH., Fenwick BW., Davidson HJ., 2003. Normal anatomical and histochemical characteristics of the lacrimal glands in the American bison and cattle. Anat Histol Embryol, 32, 257-262.
• 20. Kleckowska-Nawrot J., Dziegiel P., 2008. Morphology of lacrimal gland in pig fetuses. Anat Histol Embryol, 37, 74-77.
• 21. Mohammadpour AA., 2009. Morphological and histological study of superior lacrimal gland of third eyelid in camel (Camelus dromedarius). Iran J Vet Res, 10, 334-338.
• 22. Sinha RD., Calhoun ML., 1966. A gross, histologic and histochemical study of the lacrimal apparatus of sheep and goats. Am J Vet Res, 27, 1633-1640.
• 23. Gargiulo AM., Coliolo P., Ceccarelli P., Pedini V., 1999. Ultrastructural study of sheep lacrimal gland. Vet Res, 30, 345-351.
• 24. Kleckowska-Nawrot J., Nowaczyk R., Gozdziewska-Harłajczuk K., Krasucki K., Janeczek M., 2015. Histological, histochemical and fine structure studies of the lacrimal gland and superficial gland of the third eyelid and their significance on the proper function of the eyeball in alpaca (Vicugna pacos). Folia Morphol (Warsz), 74, 195-205.
• 25. Martin CL., Munnell J., Kawsan R., 1988. Normal ultrastructure and histochemical characteristics of canine lacrimal glands. Am J Vet Res, 49, 1566-1572.
• 26. Cabral V., Laus JL., Dagli M., Pereira GT., Talieri IC., Monteiro E., Mamede FV., 2005. Canine lacrimal and third eyelid superficial glands macroscopic and morphometric characteristics. Ciencia Rural, 35, 391-397.
• 27. El-naseery N., El-behery E., El-Ghazali H., El-Hady E., 2016. The structural characterization of the lacrimal gland in the adult dog (Canis familiaris). BVMJ, 31, 106-116.
• 28. Park SA., Taylor KT., Zwingenberger AL., Reilly CM., Toupadakis CA., Marfurt CF., Good KL., Murphy CJ., 2016. Gross anatomy and morphometric evaluation of the canine lacrimal and third eyelid glands. Vet Ophthalmol, 19, 230-236.
• 29. Burock G., 1969. Morphological and histochemical studies on the lacrimal gland of the cat. Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol, 177, 187-205.
• 30. Prokop M., 2003. General principles of MDCT. Eur J Radiol, 45, S4-S10.
• 31. Kalra MK., Maher MM., Toth TL., Hamberg LM., Blake MA., Shepard J., Saini S., 2004. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology, 230, 619-628.
• 32. Salgüero R., Johnson V., Williams D., Hartley C., Holmes M., Dennis R., Herrtage M., 2015. CT dimensions, volumes and densities of normal canine eyes. Vet Rec, 176, 386.
• 33. Abarca EM., 2020. Normal cross-sectional anatomy of the eye and orbit, In “Feline Diagnostic Imaging”. 113-127, John Wiley & Sons Inc, USA.
• 34. Yuwatanakorn K., Thanaboonnipat C., Tuntivanich N., Darawiroj D., Choisunirachon N., 2021. Comparison of computed tomographic ocular biometry in brachycephalic and non-brachycephalic cats. Vet World, 14, 3, 727-733.
• 35. Demircioğlu İ., Yumuşak N., Yılmaz B., 2016. Tavşan ve kobayda harder bezinin anatomik ve histolojik özellikleri. Harran Üniv Vet Fak Derg, 5, 61-65.
• 36. Yılmaz O., 2018. Van kedilerinde ön bacak iskeletinin bilgisayarlı tomografi ile üç boyutlu olarak incelenmesi. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Türkiye.
• 37. Ozdikici M., Bulut E., Agca S., 2021. Assessment of the orbital structures using computed tomography in healthy adults. Niger J Clin Pract, 24, 4, 561-568.
• 38. Chandrakumar SS., Zur Linden A., Owen M., Pemberton S., Pinard CL., Matsuyama A., Poirier VJ., 2019. Computed tomography measurements of intraocular structures of the feline eye. Vet Rec, 184, 651.